The Evolution of Cooperation

This is everything a popularized account of science should be. It is clear, deep, practical as well as theoretical, and very relevant. I knew of the Prisoner's Dilemma, and I knew of Axelrod's computer tournament, so I thought I wouldn't get much out of this book. I was wrong: the discussion goes

Show More

far beyond the game itself and into a grounded exposition of the growth of cooperation in a selfish environment. Fantastic.

Show Less

Robert Axelrod is a political scientist who became intrigued with an old problem known as The Prisoner’s Dilemma. (In one example two prisoners are each told that they will get a reward if they tell on the other. If neither confesses, there’s no change; if both tell, then both get another month

Show More

in jail, if one tells and the other doesn’t then the sentences are lengthened and shortened by three months each.)

The prisoner’s dilemma becomes especially interesting when it is repeated so there is a pattern of interaction between the two prisoners. Have a look at the pattern of rewards and work out what you might do?

Axelrod had the idea of inviting a range of people from different disciplines to submit their suggestions for ‘winning strategies’. He then set them off to play against each other to see which ones came off best in a long series of repetitions.

Surprisingly, the ‘best’ strategy was a very simple one known as ‘tit for tat’, which cooperated until the other side defected when it immediately defected once then continued to cooperate.

I won’t spoil the story of why it was so successful or of the translation of this simple idea into the real-world political arena. That is Robert Axelrod’s story and he tells it well.

Have a look at this and you may choose to add some of the ideas to your negotiations too.

Show Less

An accessible and comprehensive presentation of Axelrod's work that will appeal to both social scientists and computer geeks. Reading about Axelrod's work in Hofstadter's Metamagical Themas back in high school was one of two things that first got me interested in game theory. Twenty years later,

Show More

this book may seem quaint; but Axelrod's work in the early 80s blew my mind at the time.

Show Less

Explores how cooperation can emerge in a world ruled by selfishness with no central authority or rule. Axelrod demonstrates that enlightened self interest can lead to effective cooperation in any situation where the participants believe that they will need to interact with each other in the future.

Show More

These lessons can, and should be applied to personal, corporate, national, and international interactions. After reading this book I noticed that I was much less likely to take an all or nothing approach when dealing with others, and was more more likely to look for win-win options.

Show Less

You've seen The Dark Knight and you're marvelling over the outcome of the scenario with the two ferries wired with explosives and each ferry given a control that will blow the other ferry out of the water. You watched as the tension grew with each passing second. Would someone push the button to

Show More

blow the other guy out of the water or was there a way out of this?

It's a scenario referred to as the prisoner's dilemma.

This book explores that game scenario, how it came to be, how it became a winning strategy in computer gaming, and most importantly how this game is played out every day in myriad ways you never dreamed possible - especially in your own life, if you are willing to take a long, hard, honest look.

The book contains the most cogent argument for co-operation over ruthless competition as a strategy for survival and success. The might-is-right arguments of those who wield and abuse power for short-term gain are countered by proof that co-operation wins in the end and mercy triumphs over might.

"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" is more than a platitude; it's a winning strategy - the ONLY winning strategy.

This book ought to be compulsory reading in every school, family, business, place of worship, and legislature.

Show Less

One of the best introductions to rational choice theory.

Axelrod and company had have given a full blow to the war-mongering theory that strength and power are the only true answers to conflict.

So, if you are into the idea that it is better to be feared than loved, read this book and you may be enticed to re-consider.

Today and twentyfive years after

Show More

1984, Axelrod's famous computer tournament has become a must-know-about within biology and the political science. But only ten years after publication, its findings has become outdated. Still, people pinpoint to this book, because it gave the answer to a very pressing question of that time.

Starting with a famous political statement of Thomas Hobbes: life in Axelrod's world is solitary, brutish and short. Axelrod and his contemporaries call it the prisoner's dilemma. In this world, conflict is what life is about. The reason is betrayal, cheating and selfish thinking within the human species. The pressing question is: how to make the world work, so that a nuclear war is not automatic.

The answer is given in Axelrod's book -- and all summaries and reviews will tell it, too. Yet, another group of scientists came up with a modified answer by 1993. Thus, is Axelrod's book still worth reading? For two facts, yes.

1) The 1990s-experiments supports Axelrod's general findings that niceness is a good idea even in a brutish world, even though they came up with a slightly different twist.

2) Axelrod is just a very good writer.

Show Less

I read this while I was in rehab from a motorcycle accident; and even under the influence of painkillers & other meds I found it understandable. Fascinating.

An interesting evaluation of why we do/should make certain choices at certain times with respect to repeated interactions with those who have opposing interests. Especially apropos in the time of Trump.

Seminal on iterated Prisoner's Dilemma and Tit For Tat.

I found this book interesting not so much for the ideas - I am fairly familiar with basic game theory - but for the way it explained how the ideas might be applied. I have always thought game theory is overrated as a discipline, but now I think that's because much of it has forgotten what its

Show More

purpose is. I think it's most interesting when it is used to delineate the limits of possibility in an interesting strategic situation rather than when it is used to make questionable predictions or unconvincing explanations. These days much of economic game theory seems to have no relation to any strategic situation whatsoever, but just provides an extension of someone else's equally barren idea. This book has certainly inspired me to read more game theory, so I'll have the chance to be proven wrong about that opinion.

As with most non-fiction books, the second half was a bit repetitive and I skimmed through much of it, but the first four chapters were entertaining and engaging.

Show Less